Thursday, December 27, 2007

Whos your (dead beat) daddy?

The only time I`ve ever threatened my ex with anything, I told her if the children don`t ask I won`t talk, if they ask I`ll give them the shortest possible answer but `if they are lied to I`ll make sure they know the truth`.
Here`s the truth, deal with it.
I keep thinking back to my son telling me his stepfather saying I`m a dead beat dad because I didn`t work and pay child support. It`s time to deal with it.
Recently I showed my daughter a 1998 court order that released ALL of the proceeds of the sale of the T Lake property to Ms. B****. This came about because of a previous court order that I approved of using the sale proceeds to pay off any arrears in child support accumulated due to my being out of the work force in 1996 with cancer. For final calculations you might want to note that I was not obligated to pay during this two and a half years. Even though the judge responded to her request in 1996 to pay anyway through the sale proceeds with, `this is very unusual`, meaning I wasn`t obligated to pay. I said to the judge `they are my children and I`ll pay regardless`.
By 1998 the arrears amounted to just over $17,000 while my share of the sale of the property amounted to just over $24,000. Discounting the time I was not obligated to pay but did so on a voluntary basis the arrears amount would only have been $2,000. Apparently it wasn`t good enough that I pay the extra $15,000 but that the whole $24,000 of my share be turned over. Just to set the record straight I only legally owed $2,000, since that time I`ve been on a disability pension which I`m not obligated to pay child support. It does leave three years where I was, bringing the grand total of support owed to $20,000. By my calculation that still leaves me with a credit of $4,000 yet I`m still deeply in arrears. The reason I`m in arrears is because Ms. Baker failed to notify Family Maintenance Enforcement Program that I paid the full amount plus an extra $7,000. According to FMEP if a payee does not notify FMEP of a payment they are no longer entitled to FMEP assistance. Yes I did talk to them, they didn`t care.
btw that final figure does not include the 1995 agreement where I turned over my $250,000 share of the company I owned `in leu of child support` which are the exact words signed by Ms. Baker to the agreement.
This is only one of many atrocities committed and approved by a very corrupt justice system.

I should add during the three years I was able to work FMEP sent out a letter to all past and potential employers threatening that if they hired me and didn`t withhold 50% of my earning they would be prosecuted. Consequently and although I had a very good work reputation no one would hire me as they though someone making half the rate of the rest of the crew would cause trouble.
If you want to know what that means in dollars a $5,000/month job at a 34% tax rate which is average for me would send $2500 to FMEP and $1700 in taxes leaving me with $800/month. Work expenses alone cover most of that let alone rent or food, and that`s even with the fact that I don`t owe anything, in fact I have a credit in support.

There is no end to the reprehensible methods the justice industry will go to in ensuring the non-custodial parent is too broke to be a parent. Nothing too underhanded, unlawful and sometimes downright evil in the name of increased profits through parent denied children.

If the Cdn government thinks the police need restructuring it`s hard to believe they think a justice industry that is rotten to the core is just fine.

1 Comments:

At January 9, 2008 at 1:26 PM , Blogger robert smith said...

Beck, greeting from Vancouver Canada.
On the child support theme and it`s proven negative impact I read an article about a year ago concerning Texas. It stated that since Texas had increased court ordered child support and enforcement the involvement of fathers with their children had increased, which is just the opposite of what happens in Canada. Here the more child support collected the more youth problems and corresponding crime. I wrote to the TX AG explaining this and asked for the data they used to come to their conclusions. They mailed me a very comprehensive 52 page report that clearly showed an increase in child support and a corresponding increase in time spent with children by fathers. Unfortunately they didn`t include or even take into consideration the record number of jobs created during the time the data was collected. This prompted me to compare the increase in father involvement to employment gains as more fathers working means more fathers can afford to be parents. My research indicates that the increase in fathers affordability did not match employment gains, in fact it falls very short. The increased activity in time spent not matching employment gains strongly suggesting the increase in child support activity was actually holding back father affordability. To put it another way if they had left support levels where they were, time spent would have dramatically increased, not just the token increase they based their assumptions on.
As the employment situation winds down we should see time spent not only drop to historical levels but faced with dropping employment and increased child support time spent will in all probability drop well below historic levels.
For US members watch Vancouver as where you don`t want to go and Texas as where you are going.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MensIssuesOnline/message/26541

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home